[QUOTE=14emom;1094488]And like I said earlier, even lowering my fat to, like you suggested, to 40%, is a heck of a lot more than I was eating before. And I think, that is enough to help me to enjoy my meals.[/QUOTE]

My fwiw, I think you are on the right path. I know what works for some, doesnt work for everyone. And if there is one thing I am, I am persistent but I wish I would have realized sooner that high fat just wasnt working for me. Yes I was quite full, and I think that is why it didnt sink it. I was never hungry. And it might be fine for maintenance, but it was detrimental for my weight loss efforts. The scale would go down, but then go back up, and then back down, and those downs were just enough to keep me happy and make me think I was progressing. But when looking at my charts.... I wasn't losing at all.

Anyways, good luck to you!

02-13-2013, 02:27 PM

cori93437

[QUOTE=ChocoTaco369;1094477]The problem is your statement breaks down into, "Your opinion isn't valid because I said so," And now you're upset when others do the same to you? You can't have it both ways.

Look, I realize post-menopausal women are different than young men. A post-menopausal woman is going to have the toughest time of anyone losing weight, [B]and I give you all in that category all the credit in the world for putting your best foot forward[/B]. But as different as I may be from a 45+ year old woman, let's not forget that we are all human beings. We all operate under the same rules, we have the same hormones, we have the same metabolic processes. A 45+ year old woman just has the toughest hormonal profile to crack and the lowest average calorie intake to maintain body weight, so it takes a lot of extra care and attention to "do it right."

But that is no need to get vitriolic about it. I run into the most resistance from people in this age group. And I get why. There is a lot of bitterness because, let's face it, it's comparatively easy for me. I can gain 10 lbs of muscle in 3 months eating ice cream without putting a lot of body fat. I can lose 10 lbs and in 2 months by just by scaling back a bit. I can go out drinking on the weekends and really take that 20% to heart and pretty easily maintain <13% body fat. And that should piss you off because it's just not fair. But it's not a slight against you, and I really want to help. Obviously the rules are different, but you can at least take the generalities. And the generalities are this:

1.) Your hormone profile is difficult to overcome. So optimize it. That is done through heavy lifts and sprints. Don't be afraid, there's nothing hotter than a woman deadlifting and doing squats with REAL WEIGHT, and all those big guys at the gym won't beat up on you. They'll respect the hell out of you for doing it. Nothing is more impressive than a woman outlifting a man, and you'd be surprised what you can lift if you try.

2.) It's tough to maintain a caloric deficit in a diet that doesn't allow a whole lot of leeway. So this is where you want to maximize your satiety per calorie. Protein is most satisfying, so up your levels at the expense of carbohydrate and especially fat. You will be fuller longer on leaner meats than fattier meats. That doesn't mean eat steamed chicken breast. It just means to cut back on oily fried foods and fatty meats like ribeye, ribs and pork shoulder, and maybe moderate with some pork loin, sirloin and flank steak. They still taste great and are fairly lean.

3.) Recognize that while calories-in/calories-out dictate weight loss and gain, you can play some metabolic tricks.

Protein has roughly a 30% TEF - nearly 1/3 of the calories you take in with protein is lost due to how much work your body does to process it. It is more metabolically taxing.

Carbohydrate has roughly a 10% TEF - sugar and starch boost your thyroid and raise your body temperature, so some of the calories are lost due to heat.

Fat's TEF is about 0%. MCT's are around 3%. Pouring fat on is the fastest way to gain body fat. Your goal is to find the minimum amount of fat to consume where you stay full and still enjoy your meals. You really don't need to drink butter in your coffee or put butter on a ribeye steak, seriously. It's just excessive. And God, I love bacon but not everything needs to be wrapped in it.

I would recommend a fat intake of 40% for the older gals. I'm a bit lower at the 30% range, but I'm kinda active, I'm very insulin sensitive and I'm young. Even those with blood sugar issues should do well on a diet of around 40% fat, 40% protein and 20% carbohydrate. Just try and do squashes and lower GI fruits if blood glucose is an issue, and calorie-per-calorie, it'll be a lot easier than trying to lose weight on a diet of 60% fat.[/QUOTE]

I think that this is an entirely fair post... and representation of eating healthy either LC or higher carb.

And as you know I eat HFLC for medical reasons... I don't "track" so I readily admit that there are plenty of days that I likely fall into the realm of higher protein and lower fat, and I have higher carb days sometimes because there are carby foods that I enjoy but must not eat often because thy have a negative impact on my medical issue. But for the most part... HFLC.

However, in your last paragraph I think that you too readily dismiss (actually just fail to acknowledge) the segment of the population who do need, if even for a short time such as a few months, to go into the higher fat areas of 60% and above to moderate hunger issues and especially binge eating patterns. Over and over I see women who venture into HFLC who are amazed at the control that they are able to gain over their eating. And we are talking serious out of control eating patterns here, not just normal cravings or hunger from calorie restriction. The time they spend in HFLC gives them time to examine triggers, become mindful and find methods of dealing with those trigger situations, etc. These people have said over and over that they never felt in control enough, or clear enough, with other eating plans to be able to explore their deeper food issues before HFLC. There is real value in the increased satiety brought on by the HFLC extremes, even if that comes with a slower loss rate for some people.

And nothing says that those people have to stay HFLC forever... they can easily take the important lessons that they have learned about their eating patterns and transition to a lower fat, higher protein version of the diet once they feel more in control, when weight loss slows, or when closer to goal weight when higher carbs is just generally more effective.

It's not a one size fits all world.
Sometimes finding what works for you DOES mean high fat.
At least for a while...

02-13-2013, 02:40 PM

gopintos

[QUOTE=cori93437;1094518] the segment of the population who do need, if even for a short time such as a few months, to go into the higher fat areas of 60% and above to moderate hunger issues and especially binge eating patterns. Over and over I see women who venture into HFLC who are amazed at the control that they are able to gain over their eating. And we are talking serious out of control eating patterns here, not just normal cravings or hunger from calorie restriction. The time they spend in HFLC gives them time to examine triggers, become mindful and find methods of dealing with those trigger situations, etc. These people have said over and over that they never felt in control enough, or clear enough, with other eating plans to be able to explore their deeper food issues before HFLC. There is real value in the increased satiety brought on by the HFLC extremes, even if that comes with a slower loss rate for some people. [/QUOTE]

This is the only reason that I am not crying now :p I know that it was good for me in that I was able to get a grip on my hunger. I wish I wouldn't have done it for so long, but I wanted to "give it time" But yes definitely, I learned alot about foods, and about myself, so even though weight loss screeched to a halt, it was not all for naught.

I use to go for an hour trail ride and pack food like I was going to be out in the wilderness for two weeks. Now, I never give "snacks" a second thought. I don't wake up thinking about breakfast, or during the middle of the night like I did before. I don't get grouchy or cranky if I get hungry. DH and I can hop on the Harley and just go, and not worry about when/how we are going to eat.

I don't know that that would have happened the same on the CW way of dieting.

02-13-2013, 02:53 PM

cori93437

[QUOTE=gopintos;1094531]This is the only reason that I am not crying now :p I know that it was good for me, I was able to get a grip on my hunger. I wish I wouldn't have done it for so long, but I wanted to "give it time" But yes definitely, I learned alot about foods, and about myself, so even though weight loss screeched to a halt, it was not all for naught.

I use to go for an hour trail ride and pack food like I was going to be out in the wilderness for two weeks. Now, I never give "snacks" a second thought. I don't wake up thinking about breakfast, or during the middle of the night like I did before. I don't get grouchy or cranky if I get hungry. DH and I can hop on the Harley and just go, and not worry about when/how we are going to eat.

I don't know that that would have happened the same on the CW way of dieting.[/QUOTE]

I'm never going to jump up and down and say that HFLC is great for every person long term. For SOME people I think it is right... not for others. For me, I have personal reasons to be a long termer...
I lose slow, and I'm OK with that. But I also lost very slow on lower fat and higher carbs but my medical issue was not well controlled that way... it's just me and likely has something to do with my other issues.

But I do think that it's a great tool for many people.
And I don't think it should be dismissed so outright by people like Choco just because other ways work better for him, or can work "faster", or are scientifically more valid the by the way he can line up the macros.

Being stalled or plateaued for a little while is no reason to cry BTW.
Not IMO.
There is a great value in having lost weight and "kept it off" or "kept it stable" for a period of time.
There is learning in that process too.
For someone who simply loses all of their weight easily and not faced any periods of keeping stable, perhaps that lesson has not been learned. ;)

All of our life is a journey, including that part that is putting food into our bodies.
It's a long and winding road. Hopefully you can find some beauty even in the bumps.
~hugs.

02-13-2013, 02:54 PM

little vase

ChocoTaco, I appreciate everything you posted. I'm bookmarking your comments to reread when I need to.[B] LOVE[/B] the old lady lifting heavy. She rocks. Are you a trainer?

02-13-2013, 03:07 PM

gopintos

[QUOTE=cori93437;1094545]I'm never going to jump up and down and say that HFLC is great for every person long term. For SOME people I think it is right... not for others. For me, I have personal reasons to be a long termer...
I lose slow, and I'm OK with that. But I also lost very slow on lower fat and higher carbs but my medical issue was not well controlled that way... it's just me and likely has something to do with my other issues.

But I do think that it's a great tool for many people.
And I don't think it should be dismissed so outright by people like Choco just because other ways work better for him, or can work "faster", or are scientifically more valid the by the way he can line up the macros.

Being stalled or plateaued for a little while is no reason to cry BTW.
Not IMO.
There is a great value in having lost weight and "kept it off" or "kept it stable" for a period of time.
There is learning in that process too.
For someone who simply loses all of their weight easily and not faced any periods of keeping stable, perhaps that lesson has not been learned. ;)

All of our life is a journey, including that part that is putting food into our bodies.
It's a long and winding road. Hopefully you can find some beauty even in the bumps.
~hugs.[/QUOTE]

Yal I can see it having it's purpose, especially for medical reasons. That was the part of Mark's words, that I missed, that said, [QUOTE][COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial]Acceptable for a day or two of Intermittent Fasting towards aggressive weight loss efforts, provided adequate protein, fat and supplements are consumed otherwise. May be ideal for many diabetics. Not necessarily recommended as a long-term practice for otherwise healthy people due to resultant deprivation of high nutrient value vegetables and fruits.[/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial][URL="http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-primal-carbohydrate-continuum/#ixzz2Kp4T5VwJ"]J[/URL][/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

I think I was otherwise healthy, just too fat. And I did it for too long a period of time.

And I think Choco is just trying to show another way. We have plenty of threads on Fat, so if that is what a person wants to do, there is plenty of support for that. I am just guessing that was not working for OP, and that is why she asked if there was anyone that found it harder to lose trying to eat that way.

So it's not to put down the HFLC people or to try to dismiss it, it is just trying to find another way that works if HFLC isn't working.

And on the crying part, I was meaning that it was frustrating. I have just been eating all wrong for my body to lose weight. Knowing that I should be almost done, instead of half way there is aggravating. I tried to fix something that wasn't all that broken. I know, slow and steady and all that jazz, and it probably has helped me in many ways. Will help me keep it off, will help my skin, etc. but still. Even if I had just stayed at 50% fat, I could probably be 75% of the way to a more ideal weight, probably even look pretty darn good as that may be the weight I should be at anyways.

So anyways.... yes HFLC has it's place. But when it doesnt work for someone anymore, it's time to try to figure something else out.

02-13-2013, 03:14 PM

cori93437

Definitely agreed.

What works at any given time... one must be flexible, listen to their body, and adjust accordingly.
I think that a dogmatic approach is certainly the enemy of getting healthy.

02-13-2013, 03:19 PM

gopintos

[QUOTE=MakeupAddict12;1094493]I want to thank everyone for their insights. I will play with my totals some and see if things change. Keep them coming!!![/QUOTE]

I was rereading your original post. 3-4lbs is pretty good. That is what I was losing on 50% fat. Just not as fast as I was losing on 30% fat. It wasn't until I increased the fats that I ran into trouble, even though my calories were low. But, we are all different.

02-13-2013, 03:42 PM

sbhikes

[img]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-2XC9RKS1EBw/Txt7mFlT5qI/AAAAAAAAA5E/t_mn77S8gN0/s1600/396756_10150475509932676_22565487675_8922038_1661980230_n.jpg[/img]
Keep this in perspective folks. This lady doesn't look the same as this one.
[img]http://i247.photobucket.com/albums/gg158/MDA2008/MDA2009/DSC08386.jpg[/img]

Also, you gotta eat if you're going to build any strength with that lifting heavy thing. Unless lifting heavy means never making progress.

02-13-2013, 03:50 PM

Cryptocode

[QUOTE=honeybuns;1094388]Geez. I cannot express my opinion but every one else can????

Lighten up, people.[/QUOTE]

You did express it. In the future please note at the beginning of your threads that you are only interested in advise from people in exactly your demography and situation.

ChacoTaco is smart, knowledgeable and experienced. I can't imagine not wanting such advise at any time.